Rachel Kleinfeld
{
"authors": [
"Rachel Kleinfeld"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "democracy",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "DCG",
"programs": [
"Democracy, Conflict, and Governance"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Lack of Training and Money Imperil U.N. Missions More Than Does Liability
If military leaders lack control over their troops' role in U.N. missions, but can be held legally responsible for their troops’ actions, then troop contributions from richer states with better courts may be less forthcoming.
Source: New York Times
We like to ask the United Nations to do the impossible – then kick it when it fails. The Security Council gives U.N. troops missions that the five permanent members don’t want, and then it deploys them slowly, without adequate arms, hampered by rules of engagement that impede success.
Nineteen years ago, this cynical system led to a massacre. This week, it fell to a Dutch judge to provide accountability. His careful ruling held Dutch peacekeepers accountable for the 300 deaths attributable to their failure of leadership.
The verdict is apt but its side effects may further harm U.N. mission effectiveness.If military leaders lack control over their troops' role in U.N. missions, but can be held legally responsible for their troops’ actions, then troop contributions from richer states with better courts may be less forthcoming.
Meanwhile, U.N. missions from poorer countries that earn money from them will continue. This is unlikely to increase efficacy: many of these countries send troops so poorly trained and equipped that the United Nations must supply boots as well as arms.
In a world in which tens of thousands of U.N. blue helmets are deployed right now, this is no way to create stability.
The world needs the United Nations. Like democracy, it is the worst system save for all the others. If we are going to keep asking the U.N. to serve in places where the U.S. doesn’t want to go, we should help it do a better job.
First, the Security Council must provide rules of engagement that allow force, which is increasingly needed.
Second, we need a standing fund for peacekeeping. Right now, the United Nations must go begging for funds and troops only after the Security Council authorizes a mission. Months pass and war zones worsen before they can be deployed.
Finally, the United Nations increasingly needs forces that are trained, vetted and can work together, especially since so many come from poor countries. Creating training academies whose graduates are first in line for deployment would help. And it would be a good use of some of the billions President Obama just authorized for foreign military training, in his bid to keep the United States out of future wars.
This article was originally published in the New York Times Room for Debate.
About the Author
Senior Fellow, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Rachel Kleinfeld is a senior fellow in Carnegie’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, where she focuses on issues of rule of law, security, and governance in democracies experiencing polarization, violence, and other governance problems.
- Civil Society Repression Internationally and Historically Within the United StatesTestimony
- For Expertise to Matter, Nonpartisan Institutions Need New Communications StrategiesPaper
Renée DiResta, Rachel Kleinfeld
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Unstrategic Ambiguity: Trump’s Erratic Approach Leaves Europe GuessingArticle
The behaviors, public statements, and policies of Donald Trump’s administration have perverted America’s strategic posture toward Europe.
Dan Baer, Erik Brown
- On NATO, Trump Should Embrace France Instead of Bashing ItCommentary
Donald Trump’s repudiation of NATO goes against the Make America Great Again vision of a U.S.-centered foreign policy. If the goal is to preserve the alliance by boosting Europe’s commitments, leaning into France’s vision is the most America First way forward.
Rym Momtaz
- Kindred Nations, Uneasy Neighbors: Polish-Ukrainian Relations in the Crucible of Russia’s WarArticle
The full-scale invasion cemented Ukraine’s determination to sever its ties with Russia; reimagining the Poland-Ukraine partnership can accelerate Kyiv’s westward alignment and improve the security of both countries.
Eric Green
- Southeast Asia’s Agency Amid the New Oil CrisisCommentary
There is no better time for the countries of Southeast Asia to reconsider their energy security than during this latest crisis.
Gita Wirjawan
- Fuel Crisis Forces Politically Perilous Trade-Offs in IndonesiaCommentary
As conflict in the Middle East drives up fuel costs across Asia, Indonesia faces difficult policy trade-offs over subsidies, inflation, and fiscal credibility. President Prabowo’s personalized governance style may make these hard choices even harder to navigate.
Sana Jaffrey